MCB attending Holocaust day
Common sense has prevailed it seems within the MCB:
The Muslim Council of Britain will attend next year’s Holocaust Memorial Day after ending its controversial boycott of the event.
The MCB’s working committee voted by 18 to 8 this weekend to end its six year boycott of the commemoration, the Guardian reports.
Supporters of the day claimed that the previously held stance was causing accusations of anti-semitism. [Via Totally Jewish]
Too little too late or should the MCB receive kudos for this latest move?
I’m going to be sparing with the kudos I’m afraid. The MCB has impressed over the teddy bear thang, first time I’ve seen them give condemnations without caveats and believed them. Attending Holocaust Memorial Day is likewise another leap in the right direction - but I can’t help but suspect their sincerity, losing the government’s ear and funding has hit them right in the knackers I think.
I agree. I think expediency over principle here, step in the right direction even so.
Definitely a step in the right direction…also do think that holocaust day should incorporate other atrocities…rememberance of victims from all over the world..
Sofia,
At least we agree on that one!
Joy1
>>The MCB has impressed over the teddy bear thang, first time I’ve seen them give condemnations without caveats and believed them
ditto!! in the space of 3 hours(when the news first broke that is), i heard or read condemnation from at least 3 MCB’ers.
definitely on the right path but long way to go and no room for complacency..
It’s a good sign that the leadership is seeing reason. I’d add that Inyawat Bunglawala did really well against the Sudanese ambassador over Teddybeargate on Newsnight last week.
It’s probably worth bearing in mind that the people who voted against attending are still floating around the MCB. Kudos to the leadership, qualified kudos to the MCB.
Kudos, I wouuld say…
Kudos, yes. But they really do need to take a stand on Saudi Arabia’s human rights violations too. I suspect they might find that more difficult.
What is the point of attending the Holocaust Memorial Day when they’re all in bed with Jamaati Islami clerics who are War Criminals involved with the genocide in Bangladesh in 1971? Stand up Motiur Rahman Niazi and be counted.
True, but it is even more shameful that the UK and the US do little to nothing about it either.
Refresh, you should also read the content of this article- written by Alasdair Palmer
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/21/nbung21.xml
THanks
As I said, my comments were not against Inayat Bunglawala, they were against the ideology.
i was quoting the newspaper article in the telegraph, and must of not quoted it properly
Joy1, can you provide a link to back up your claim that Inayat called Bin Laden a freedom fighter in 2001? If not please withdraw it.
Totally agree Ravi #14…The Uk and US governments seem to turn a blind eye to human rights’ abuses in Saudi Arabia, as it suits a foreign policy agenda that has little to do with “values” and more to do with economics and self interest.
Same goes for policy towards India and also the US…
I did Leon http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/21/nbung21.xml
misquoted…lol…
you talking about this…funny i don’t see any bin laden lovin from inayat here…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/20/nmus20.xml
did you not read this:
Mr Bunglawala said: “Those comments were made some 12 or 13 years ago. All of us may hold opinions which are objectionable, but they change over time. I certainly would not defend those comments today.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/08/21/nbung21.xml
That one actually
some people are beyond any type of non sensationalist type of debate..or any type of debate that is capable of looking at the grey..*sigh*
the awful thing about being in the public eye..is that mistakes, misjudgement and stupidity are out there for all to see…this does not mean ppl do not move on, recognise their faults and try to evolve…
Inayat has given his view on the vote:
Puzzling that he limits ‘detractors’ on this to Muslims only as if non Muslims opinions have less value on this issue.
Because Leon, I think he should seek independent advice.
Certainly Inayat has moved on from his earlier, positions, but whether that is because he has modified his views or because he has been over-taken by events is unclear. Possibly a bit of both.
If the MCB do split because of this it might be to their advantage, a smaller but more coherent and ‘progressive’ umbrella organisation could well contribute more to the debate than a massive group so disparate that it can’t be said to have a position.
OT: Have Pickled Politics missed the suggestion in the news (BBC Asian Network) that the British Indin women are going to India to have sex selective abortions? This is a very worrying revelation (if it’s true and one which I woulfd like to see analysed on PP.
@ Sid 12 et al - the MCB is a heterogeneous organisation and, in the same way that the Labour Party is not necessarily representative of Labour votes, has ebbs and flows. Deciding to attend Holocaust Memorial Day is a step towards moving certain sections of the MCB away from elements we might find distasteful.
Just seems to me they’re getting some PR smarts. The MCB’s boycott was such an own goal I’m surprised they stuck with it, but maybe they’re learning. I won’t forget though.
I do agree though that the Day should be extended to genocide in general, but not the hostage of any political cause - ie, it should commemorate Srebenica and Armenia, and we should remember Darfur and get angry, but Palestine is pushing it, frankly.
David Cole, I think adoption of heterogeneity could see the unravelling of the MCB as it stands today. I agree with Don, in that this may utimately be a good thing; small = more representative and all that. But my comment underlines a fundamental hypocrisy in the MCB. Whereas they may now be forced to attend the HMD for reasons of expediency, the denial of the genocide in East Pakistan in 1971 is not associated with the MCB even though there is a more direct, first hand relationship between certain members of the MCB and the genocide in 1971 than there is between some abstract MCB policy of attending or paying liperservice to the the attendance of Holocaust Denial Memorial.
personally, i think holocaust remembrance day was a stupid idea - as if it had anything particular to do with the UK. if anything it should be a general genocide remembrance day (and, no, i don’t think palestine would “qualify”, either, as if it’s the world cup, feh) - as it is, it’s far too divisive, too much open to becoming a political hot potato (”we’ve got a beer, a football team, a flag, an airline and a genocide!”). imho, there’s way too much holocaust obsession in anglo-jewry without boring the rest of the country to tears with it as well. and i say that the son-in-law of an auschwitz survivor who still lives with it.
b’shalom
bananabrain
still, i forgot to say, it’s a good idea the mcb have *some* grasp of political realities, maybe they can learn to be pragmatists after all rather than a bunch of rather dimwitted east asian communitarians.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Bananabrain
“refresh: what price free speech now?”
I wonder too. It does make you wonder when lies and defamation can be passed for open debate.
hmmm. if only people were generally more polite, is all i can say. if it’s defamatory, fair enough, sue. otherwise, it’s fair comment.
b’shalom
bananabrain
“hmmm. if only people were generally more polite, is all i can say. if it’s defamatory, fair enough, sue. otherwise, it’s fair comment.”
I would agree with that in general - but be wary just because someone may not sue does not make it fair comment.
B’brain,
While you are of course right that a general genocide memorial day is more ethically balanced, you have also put your finger on the problem: the can of worms that would be opened if we try to get a concensus on what constitutes a genocide.
The two most obviously intractable problems would seem to be Bangladesh and the Turkish Armenians. Add to that the Native Americans, the Tasmanians, the Irish famine, the post-mutiny (or whatever) killings and famines, the Highland clearances, Biafra, Rwanda, Darfur, Irian Jaya, …
The holocaust is the most documented, most comprehensive and sustained, most vividly remembered and most unequivocal of these horrors. Let the part stand for the whole in good faith, without partisan quibbles and ‘me too-ery’.
justagal: Have Pickled Politics missed the suggestion in the news (BBC Asian Network) that the British Indin women are going to India to have sex selective abortions?
This was covered in the Observer earlier this year I believe. We covered it here then. Unfortunately Asian Network seems more concerned with regurgitating existing stories these days than finding new ones.
True, but it is even more shameful that the UK and the US do little to nothing about it either.
I don’t think this applies. Governments are loathe to get involved in the affairs of citizens of other countries because it may come back to haunt them. The Brits may want to say something about the Saudi woman but will they take it if the Saudis started passing comment on Charles De Menzes?
It makes more sense to pass comment on your own citizens… the likes of the MCB could have made more noise about the Saudi woman but they’ve never struck me as people interested in human rights - only their narrow self-interest.
Sunny,
We have been condemned right, left and centre for the Jean Charles De Menzes fiasco.
And rightly too.
It was an abhorrent breach of human rights. Or a Health and Safety issue if you prefer.
I am not at all happy that we have not had a public enquiry into 7/7, either.
It should not stop decent folk standing up against barbaric practices elsewhere.
So, your challenge, for that is what I take it to be, is for the MCB to speak out against cruel and unusual punishment and counterfactual judicial processes elsewhere? If so, I’m with you.
Sunny, the peculiarity of that stance is that you will not accept any comment from the MCB with regards our own foreign policy, but demand they comment where the FCO won’t. I suggest a challenge is to the FCO. Not necessarily to a domestic NGO.
That said, its an appalling state of affairs that the woman should have ever been put on trial. Do we know anything about the perpetrators? Is it akin to what passes for justice on the sub-continent - whoever has the greater influence gets the justice they can afford? This is a very important point - is it corruption at work that landed the victim in trouble?
I would like the MCB to start flexing its muscle and let the Saudis know its gone past a joke. Because it is the right thing to do.
At the same time I too would like the MCB to add its voice to the call for a public enquiry on 7/7. Unless they already have.
Similarly the MCB seems to be incapable of speaking up for victims of Guantanamo Bay; and incapable against those governments that use torture whether against internal dissidents or outsourced for the US.
The MCB may well have decided to attend the Holocaust Memorial Day as it has had an internal voting process…that is fair enough.
I personally do not feel the need to attend, as i am of the opinion that how one chooses to commenorate their dead is a private matter and should not be politicised. This goes for all genocides…i actually oppose the very idea of expanding this day to incorporate other crimes. (Hence again i disagree with the initial MCB position which was stated as thus)
Personally as a Muslim i don’t show grief over the dead through memorials and any other public displays, that is my choice and i don’t feel i should be made to feel as though i am going against the grain of common decency by politely declining whilst acknowledging this awful tragedy.
Such a public display is almost akin to a secular religion, being promulgated by the state, where you have to witness and participate in rituals even though you do not believe in them.
Saqib,
Whilst you and I would probably disagree 100% on why we agree, I do, in fact, agree with you. Is it, perhaps, to do with personal space as opposed to public genuflection? To be seen to be on the side of the ‘good’? When you were just OK with the idea anyway?
It would be interesting to tease out of you what you think about the barbaric ideas of the Saudis, with especial reference to the rape victim. Are you willing to stand up and say they are utterly and completely wrong?
Personally, I hope you are.
Kudos for MCB? The favourite whipping boy for posters at Pickled Politics? Don’t make me laugh. Where will Sunny be if the MCB was the docile submissive organisation that he has long campaigned for? That’s right, without a platform.
Human rights you say Sunny, not once have you spoke out against the violence perpetuated by those claiming to fight the good fight of secularism:
As exposed here: http://disha-bangladesh.blogspot.com/
Saudi and MCB: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/mai_yamani/2007/11/punishing_the_victim.html#comment-9491691111
In that vain, you may as well ask to state ‘We the MCB, for the record, publish our daily record of condemnation of all the human rights abuses in the world’
Disha,
I am probably not your favourite stereotype. I am, for a start white, I am an atheist, I fart, hah, hah. But, if the MCB is willing to enter this century and stop thinking that medevial law is A-OK then I’d be willing to listen. It is your act that is fucked up.
Oh, and Disha,
Where do you stand on the Saudi rape victim? It is a simple question. An answer would be good. Any answer that serves politics or religion would, obviously get me on your case. You don’t want that, do you?
‘Cause you will comprehensively lose.
Oh, I missed out, I am a man too. There you go.
Where will Sunny be if the MCB was the docile submissive organisation that he has long campaigned for? That’s right, without a platform.
Heh, I have bigger fish to fry than the MCB. In the grand scheme of things they matter very little.
Sunny, the peculiarity of that stance is that you will not accept any comment from the MCB with regards our own foreign policy, but demand they comment where the FCO won’t.
Refresh - it’s quite obvious why governments are loathe to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries. I’ve explained it above. NGOs on the other hand have more freedom. In the same way, being an independent commentator I can say things that other people that are part of organisations cannot say things.
All human life is equally precious. So those who divide people in the name of religion, color or race should be exposed.
MCB’s initial boycott of the Holocaust memorial was in extremely bad taste. Hopefully they will not repeat such mistakes in future.
I have bigger fish to fry than the MCB.
Do you? Like who?
‘Disha’ is right: without the MCB, you wouldn’t know what to do with yourself. You must be secretly gutted that they are changing their ways.
Disha,
Perhaps a semi relgious organisation would be well served if it did, indeed, have as part of its’ raison d’étre - simple statements like these:
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
Article One - United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
And:
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
Article Five.
Might concentrate some minds on what is important and what is ridiculous. Might mean that a semi religious organisation could actually understand why it ought to stand up against cruel and barbaric treatment, whether or not it is said to be scripturally based, and no matter who perpetrates it.
Seems to me.
You are having a laugh too, aren’t you?
Dishan,
Why do I think you are a sock puppet? Might it be because Disha came on here with a pov, and is suddenly supported by someone who has never been here before who simply adds an ‘n’ to his or her name? Yes, that must be it.
Silly me.
#45 The MCB did call for a public inquiry into 7/7…also recently on a programme on religion (Sunday mornings, not sure what channel) a while back this call was reiterated and the Mcb rep was completely lambasted by the presenter…why the need for an inquiry etc…don’t you trust the govn..blah blah..the programme itself is a load of shit..
Sohia,
I know the MCB, and a lot of other folk too, have asked for an official enquiry into 7/7. The MCB are like the curates’ egg: good in parts.
My response to Sunny was not about the MCB, it was along the lines of not commenting on other countries policies simply because our government have fallen short of reasonable standards themselves. These are universal issues, not factional ones.
Where do you stand on the Saudi rape victim? It is, perhaps, another ph test.
Sohia,
Or Sofia, sorry about that.
Dilshan,
Maybe.
I have re-read your post, I cannot see anything to suggest I was mistaken. Apart from missing the ‘l’, perhaps.
Have you commented here previously and I’ve just missed it? Have you anything to say yourself that would differentiate you from Disha?
You could try this:
Where do you stand on the Saudi rape case?
C’mon, you must have a viewpoint.
I do agree with you that the MCB would boost its credibility if it was shown to be genuinely interested in the lives of muslims here and abroad, regardless of whether the state is secular or muslim.
However, Western democracies still have much more power than organizations and individuals to influence rogue states to be less repressive to its citizens. There is also a fundamental difference in the cases you mention: the Charles de Menezes case was seen as a fiasco by everyone including in the last ruling on the matter, whereas the Saudi Arabian government considers what was done to the Saudi woman as justice. So I think even if the Saudi Arabian government had the gull to bring the de Menezes case to the British government, it wouldn’t have any consequences because it is was an established fact.
My point is that I see little point in castigating the MCB for something our government does not do or care. After all, our dependence on oil is far more important than our conscience. And the MCB - as far as I know - doesn’t have a foreign office.
I would be more impressed if the MCB just focused on inter-community relations, and erradicating radical Islam from our mosques and communities. Of course, in reality they would be fighting for more integration - and by definition, if all muslims were completely integrated (as well as other religious communities), there would be no need for “religious” organisations to hijack the voice of the majority.
Douglas, why do you ask about the saudi rape case…most ppl are in essence decent…and in this in mind I would like to think that most ppl would think what is happening to this woman is absolutely abhorrent..this is nothing to do with Islam…rather a patriarchal desert tribe that found oil and now has more money than sense and very little real power (what with being puppets)…with money comes abuse and when men feel threatened by their own inadequacies, the easiet target of their lack of power, is women…it’s easy to be general about saudi ppl and I wouldn’t want to do this, but this is about justice. It seems to me that the “powers” that be in saudi are interested in sending out a clear message to women. I feel sorry for the ordinary ppl who suffer as usual, be it men or women..according to a CIF article, the man this woman was with, was also raped…not sure what has happened to him…
Personally, I think your view is shortsighted. It is not about showing grief over people you never knew or their families. It is about acknowledging and remembering what happens when we keep silent to the voices of extremism. It is all the more ironic the MCB has decided to skip all these years taking into account what goes on in our communities.
Question: when the bosnians have their own day and the rwandans have their own day etc etc etc..will we all be expected to commemorate with them?
Yes. Busy agenda, Sofia?
seems kinda silly…i don’t actually agree with holocaust day…and only thought the mcb should attend as they were getting stick for not attending and this was detracting from anything else they did…now there is a holocaust day, it should look at other communities who have suffered..not just one…
Dilshan,
Thanks for your reply. As you might expect, I disagree with your analysis. There are fundamental conceits that Liberals tend to bring up at the dinner table. One is that barbaric conduct should be attacked directly, no matter who is doing it. You probably won’t agree with this, but the Royal Navy, by intervention in the slave trade, arguably did more for that brand of liberalism than any organisation in history. It is in that tradition that we should all, at the very least, speak out against medieval practices. I, for one, would be absolutely delighted if the MCB joined in in that condemnation. Their silence is deafening.
Sunny is not the one trick pony that you characterise, he has a lot to say about social organisation and the issues around it. He is particularily good on human rights, especially those relating to women. In juxtaposition, the MCB is a bit of an Aunt Sally for liberals of almost any persuasion. Their new leaders’ failure to absolutely and unconditionally condemn stoning, for example, makes him unlikely to be acceptable as a dinner guest.
Here:
That, for me at least, is the issue.
Sofia,
Thanks for the reply. Your response was as I hoped it would be. See below.
*claps loudly*
and there you have it. by your own logic, the case is sickening, but the case is the law and the law is islam. the only trouble is, that means islam is therefore sickening. and i don’t think any of us are going to be happy with that. and if you are happy to accept islam as being sickening, i think that’s a complete moral failure.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Douglas, i’m surprised you ask the question in the first place. It reminds me of the bush you’re either with us or against us…policy…
Dilshan…you get it all wrong..this is NOT ABOUT ISLAM…and nothing to do with islamic law…
Refresh,
Why? Because it is indeed a litmus test. And because I am a bit tired of pretending that all opinions have equal merit. Or, at least, listening to those that think they do. FYI, I am a bit reassured by the replies.
And you were not alone in thinking that Joy1 was out of order. I did too.
“Of course the Saudi rape case is sickening. But that is the law according to Islam. I do not agree with it, but Islam will be Islam.”
This is pure rubbish. The Saudi government is corrupt. I do not believe that it is the law, I believe it is the interpretation used by a corrupt court.
Otherwise how can anyone explain where there have been beheadings for rape?
I still want to know whether bribery and corruption plays a part in Saudi courts as it does in the sub-continent.
and, i should have added, equating what they get up to in saudi with islam as a whole is frankly a) ridiculous and b) makes islam out to be as backward as its most rabid critics claim it is. the sooner the rest of islam stands up and says “saudi are a bunch of backward mediaeval feckwits” the better. but that would mean cutting off all that free money that the strings are attached to. it’s the same with the governments, let’s not point out the “elephant in the room”, it might queer our oily pitch.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Sofia,
I stand by what I said in post 72. Your OK, so you are! And that is about as far away from the mangled words of G W Bush as you are likely to get.
Read bananabrains final paragraph in post 74 to understand why an outsider - such as myself - might have an issue with silence on a topic like this.
You however have made your position very clear indeed, and I salute you!
bananabrain..the problem with your comment on the rest of islam standing up against saudis, is it makes no sense..what is the rest of islam? do you mean muslims? if so, then you are talking about a disparate bunch of ppl with a difference of opinions, often coloured by their cultural beliefs depending on where they live and their own experiences…
So are you (bananabrain, doug, refresh, sofia etc) saying that you know more than all those Islamic scholars in Saudi, the sanctuary of the harams?
Douglas, the saudis are a particular breed i would say when it comes to interpretation…i’ve mentioned before in other posts that saudi arabia has only recently been looked upon or rather force fed its version of islam on the rest of the muslim world. In the past, centres of Islamic teaching were damascus, cairo. You will find eminent scholars in cairo being completely ignored for being too “liberal” and these voices are being lost. When a certain community or communities feel threatened they will close ranks and close doors…they will become more ruthless and pick on the vulnerable in their societies to shut off dissent or any progressive thought. I would see the muslim communities going through this at the moment…it is not fair however for ordinary muslims to be held account for events they cannot have any control over…and by account i mean the kind of questions we are being forced to answer. I do not do this to anyone..unless they are personally responsible for something, or in some way involved or feeding it.
estado..frankly..the custodians of the haram sharif are not those in power and not the ones who are carrying out the judgements, rather they are the silent onlookers..which in a way makes them complicit. If islam was the religion the saudi “powers” made it appear to be, i for one would not believe in it..thank god i know how to read to make up my own mind.
So, sofia, are you – a non-Arabic speaker who was taught the Koran by rote from obese Pakistani Mullahs – suggesting that the Saudis did not consult with Islamic law before deciding no the punishment and the crime?
They did not come out with the punishment arbitrarily.
Sofia,
Yup, I remember you posting on that point - about interpretation. Which I thought was well made.
It is however worthwhile, I think, trying to tease out of folk what their opinions are on certain subjects. I am not, repeat not, holding folk to account. That would be ridiculous.
What I was trying to determine was what Muslim opinion on PP was in relation to this particular case. Out of interest.
first of all just because i am a non arabic speaker does not make me less versed in certain aspects of Islamic law. I can read..and guess what..they do have translations available..i am by no means claiming to be a scholar..but then again, these courts are not always run by scholars..so get your facts right.
Secondly I was not taught by obese pakistani mullahs…so i will correct you on that note too. Who I have been taught by and am continually taught by is non of your business, but they aren’t pakistani and they aren’t obese..not that i’m sure what waist and weight have got to do with anyhing..unless you are implying that all pakistani mullahs are obese..and this must in some way either be detrimental to their islamic knowledge or in someway is a prerequisite alongside their pakistaniness, to become mullahs??
btw agencia.. if you knew anything about fiqh, shariah, schools of jurisprudence and the rest, you would know about ijtihad and about differing opinions.
If this woman’s crime was being alone with a man, then in some opinions this is wrong, in others it is open to interpretation depending on circumstance..so once again..don’t talk to me about arbitrary, when the whole case is arbitrary…and subject to the political whims and desires of saudi pseudo religious fascism.
Agencia Estado,
It is arbitrary punishment. In it’s autocratic sense. And by the way, liberal thought has quite a bit of history too. Have you actually got a view on whether or not this act of barbarity can be justified ex scripture?
Thought not.
sofia: i *know* islam is a disparate bunch of people with differing opinions. consequently, i can’t accept points of view which *equate* saudi with islam; of course, it is a position within islam, but an extreme, unpleasant, negative, corrosive, anti-intellectual, literalist, repressive position - but a very, very well-funded one. what i am saying is a) cut all this “‘ummah” shite because it just isn’t real (i’m not accusing you of this) b) stop obsessing about fitna and bid’a c) address the ijtihad issue and d) start to deal with the true biodiversity of religion. i am talking about people standing up and saying “the saudis don’t represent me, as a muslim i object to the way they behave, they are mistaken in x y and z and this is my alternative.” an attack on one sect is *not* an attack on all - just be honest about it, be honest about the contradictory interpretations of the Qur’an and hadith and stop trying to make it out to be 100% consistent and monolithic. islam has, for its own and all our sake, to ditch the mentality of the “pact of omar” once and for all. i know you’ve got the right idea, but you have to stand up and HOLD YOUR OWN to account, not complain about others from outside islam doing it. you may not be personally responsible for mad stuff the saudis get up to, but you *are* personally responsible for standing up and saying that !UP WITH THIS I WILL NOT PUT!” - as a muslim and as a human being, just as members of other religions are personally responsible for it. look at the christians that are doing it, john shelby spong, jim wallis and so on, look at the jews that are doing it, michael lerner, michael melchior and arik ascherman among others, there are muslims doing it too - so don’t wait for *me* to kick you up the bum; you’re clever enough to figure out what your moral responsibilities are.
estado: what sofia said in #84.
b’shalom
bananabrain
its true that there is alot of anti saudi sentiment among muslims themselves. i mean we, muslims, celebrate Eid on different days here in the UK (and the world) - 2 major groups are: Saudi & their followers(primarily UK mosques funded by the saudis&followers )” and then those that arent.
D.C
>>What I was trying to determine was what Muslim opinion on PP was in relation to this particular case. Out of interest.
I’m glad you clarified that as i was wondering why you asked myself. I havent been posting for that long but i kind of hoped you would justify your reasons of questioning, and you have.
I think you will find that SA is a theocratic monarchy. It works like this: for the monarchy, Islam doesn’t really mater that much (hence they are in to usury, selling oil to capitalists, Western education, and modernity). The Islamic theocracy kicks in for the population at large: the ‘little man/woman’ – hence Islam is applied for civil and criminal matters, such as rape. They have a plethora of Islamic scholars who organise this. Inevitably, they will know more than you because they speak Arabic – something is always lost in translation…
bananabrain, thank you for clarification…i do stand up when i feel there is something wrong and when i don’t think ppl represent me. Mine is more localised and not high profile as that is not my way…my own struggle is twofold..one is the spiritual, and the other turning into practice what i believe islam teaches, which is to me..peace, and a sense of community, helping others and trying to put myself in perspective to the rest of society..this is not easy when you continuously have negative images of muslims both warranted and unwarranted..
>> Mine is more localised and not high profile as that is not my way
and even if it was, i imagine you/we would be fighting against the news that actually sell.
agenci, excuse my retardness here, but i dont actually understand the point youre making/trying to make
Agencia Estado,
You don’t have to understand the language, you don’t have to understand the culture, you don’t have to understand the religion. All you have to do is look at the outcome. And the outcome is an affront to common sense.
yeh and the arab is not better than the non arab…translation comes with context…you may be slightly off with translation, context will set you straight, as will precedence…they may know more than me because they have read maybe more and studied more than me..but they do not “know” more..they are more ignorant and illiterate than ppl who cannot read or write and with less humanity.
agencia, do you know anything about islam or do you rely on your newsreel ?
and furthermore i am not making excuses for anything..i am explaining..if you don’t understand i can go through it again..very slowly
Re: the last point in post 99: “They will know more than you because they speak Arabic – something is always lost in translation”. The background one is raised in does colour interpretation of legal rulings which is the point behind having Imams who have a British background rather than, say, from a remote part of NWFP.
hahaha…omg..you really are funny agencia…are you sure you’re not muzamdar in disguise again
adnan this was not a question of background, but of language..two often intertwining issues, but nevertheless separate in certain circumstances.
Well post 99 moved onto that:
“You have to ask yourself: are you both reading the same book? If yes, why are learned Islamic scholars consistently coming out with interpretations so sickening?”
erm, Sofia is actually doing quite well against you. it was me who made that comment - and i did so, given what you wrote and concluding islam is barbaric.
when you say ’shahih’ muslim, are you referring to sahih muslim?
so youve studied two traditional renowned hadiths?
Re: 119. Well they’ve gone for an extra harsh interpretation based on some conception of adultery and the “wicknedness” of womankind.
I should’ve said a totally idiotic interpretation in my last post.
good point Sid in no. 36
“where you have to witness and participate in rituals even though you do not believe in them”..
..that is a good sentence, sums up why religion has been absolutely useless to me, all that meaningless ritual we have to participate in.
i think its interesting to find out what people think about the Saudi rape case, so i’m intrigued to hear what replies Douglas gets. Incidentally, i’m sure the Saudi authorities,the custodians of the two holy mosques, would have a good laugh if the MCB said something to them, i bet they’d be like, “..and who cares what YOU think? the british govt might humour you but you’re a bunch of hindiyas and pakis, ha!” Still, that doesn’t mean the MCB ought not to try.
yep Ravi- i agree “It is not about showing grief over people you never knew or their families. It is about acknowledging and remembering what happens when we keep silent to the voices of extremism.”
anyhow people i.e. individuals obviously dont physically need to go to ’show support’ and commemorate something. you can do that sitting in front of your computer - its the principle, and the thought.
It is interesting to hear people’s responses to Saudi arabian rules which are obviously draconian, and the relationship between that - and ‘true’ islam. (whatever that is) obviously there isn’t any such thing as ‘true’ anything, depends on what people think of as ‘islam’ in the first place. but seeing its all meant to be based on what some other man who came out of the same bit of desert ( from which the Saudi authorities clearly derive a lot of symbolic power, and significance due to the Hajj) said, and his actions seemed pretty draconian to me, and he clearly was also interested in Power, so perhaps there isn’t any one such thing as Islam, just a lot of dodgy men hanging out in deserts, thirsting after power, and somehow their traditions getting set in stone and passed down the ages to people in different places ( which they conquered incidentally) so no suprise no one can agree what Islam is, and what’s a dodgy “desert” practice ( or as far as i can see, dodgy imperial practice, which is clearly not restricted to the desert! Still God appears to choose the desert for sending memos, so hey)
i think the problem in many cases is literalism; what karen armstrong, in “the battle for G!D”, a comparative study of fundamentalism (which i recommend*) describes as the tendency to treat mythos as logos, thus 6 days, meaning 24 hours, or muhammad having a flying horse, that sort of thing. the taleban and wahhabis (and the sort of christian evangelists nobody likes around here) are both leading examples of this literalist interpretation; the iranian government and its lebanese stooges hizbollah are excellent examples of what happens when you try and *remake* the world in line with a *literal* understanding of what are meant to be esoteric doctrines, thus ahmadinejad claims to be taking his orders from the hidden imam, messianically-inclined right-wing rabbis talks about arabs being from the kabbalistic equivalent of the dark side of the force, etc, etc.
the problem is the interpretation, not the text. we all know the texts of the Tanakh, NT and Qur’an are almost infinitely malleable in the service of human interpretation; the question must be how to best fulfil the Divine Will, not our own petty, human prejudices about law, history, land and power - and about taking responsibility for our own actions. we jews have a framework for this, based on principles from the written and oral Torah, which include:
“the Torah speaks in human language”
“[the Law] is not in heaven”
“after the majority shall you incline (but the opinion of the minority shall be preserved)”
“My children have defeated Me” (that’s G!D speaking)
“Torah has 70 faces”
“justice, justice you must pursue”
“you shall love the stranger, for you were strangers in egypt”
i’ve studied enough about it to *know* islam has the texts and a way to do the same; all it takes is the will to make it so.
b’shalom
bananabrain
* the book, not the fundamentalism, obviously
Who should look at other communities? If the MCB is so concerned about the suffering of other communities, why doesn’t it organise a memorial on their behalf?
And if you are invited for a memorial for your friend, do you refuse it because it doesn’t include your other friends and neighbours who passed away? What a pathetic little excuse.
Only 50 years have passed since “civilized” Europe did ethnic cleanising in its centre at a scale never seen before. It didn’t happen by chance either: the demonisation of communities became acceptable discourse. And good and decent people didn’t do anything.
As ugly nationalism is rising once again in Europe, this time in suits and now with the full knowledge on how to abuse freedom of speech to their own advantage, it is worth remembering the lessons of the past, Sofia… even if you find it silly.
Yes, I do agree that Islam is very similar to Christianism. In the past, Christians have commited the most horrific acts by taking the Bible all too literally. If the Church managed to reform, then so can Islam.
But theocracies really suck.
If the MCB is so concerned about the suffering of other communities, why doesn’t it organise a memorial on their behalf?
Because for whatever reason, recent Islamist politics have found it useful to deny two genocides. One European one, which Islamists had no part in but have see no need to refuse being blamed for by denying it. And one South Asian one, in which they had first hand complicity - but which they feel the need to deny.
Douglas, missed your #77.
I can’t think, in the wildest of imaginings, that anyone would accept what has happened in that case. Except those that have a direct interest in the case - which if it had gone in the way of (Saudi) justice, would have meant the beheadings of several men - and of course the agent provocateurs, one or two of which have joined us.
That is why there is no litmus test necessary.
With regards the actual case itself, is it not convenient for some people that the case has gone the way it has - Lots of lashes and no beheadings?
Do you not think there is a fiddle here? That is why I said above that there is some corrupt court in play.
If you accept my analysis, it dramatically changes the discussion that is going on here.
Bananabrain,
Excellent post. Your #124.
Refresh,
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
I see the point you are making, given that ‘justice’ system, the outcome should have been executions of the men involved. The fact that that has not happened is a further twist in the story. So, on that point I do indeed accept your analysis.
I was brought up to believe that if you are not sure about something, you should ask questions.
I raised this issue because I was curious about how Muslim commentators here viewed the case.
What is interesting, to me at least, is the universal condemnation. Which is a damn fine thing to see.
It is important, I think, that folk are represented by people that reflect their views. So, my one remaining question is why isn’t the MCB acting a bit more like Amnesty International over a case that clearly falls within their ambit?
Douglas,
I should also say, your response to Joy1 was decent and honourable.
>>Sofia, when islam claims to be for all time for all people, context is irrelevant.
muzamdar/agencia, unfortunately for you, i dont know how to respond to your circular extremist views on islam and will bow out as other sensible posters have done.
Douglas,
“It is important, I think, that folk are represented by people that reflect their views. So, my one remaining question is why isn’t the MCB acting a bit more like Amnesty International over a case that clearly falls within their ambit?”
I do hope the MCB will accept this role. Perhaps its time has come. It links nicely to what Ahmed and Warsi had to do, because it was necessary.
In a way several of the posters have given an answer to your question.
Its not surprising that we will end up relying on NGOs to become intermediaries, given our government has shot itself in the foot by accepting Blair’s messianic lurch into the end of times.
Guys, I think it should be obvious that if anyone comes here suddenly with a new names and starts saying particular things - that it is Muzumdar. Surely it’s obvious Disha/Dilshan/Agencia is the same person? Jeez.
Anyway, to respond to other points:
The sooner you start frying the bigger fish the better. In the meantime we will have to find the means to reverse this disgraceful state of affairs.
Refresh, you don’t half moan all the time. I do have abigger fish to fry but that doesn’t mean I’m going to let these so-called “community leaders” off the hook by filling their pockets in the name of community cohesion. What makes me laugh is your victim mentality but then I’ve encountered so many insular brown people such as yourself that I’ve learned to ignore it.
personally, i’d start to respect the mcb if they took on board the criticism of people like irshad manji and started fighting for *general* social justice, not just for muslims within the uk and in the world, but addressing oppressive practices inside islam and working for an ethical and tolerant british society - and that is NOT the same thing as the identity politics of grievance!
b’shalom
bananabrain
124 - bananabrian - Go on be brave. Why not take it one step further - ‘texts’ are the root problem - their interpretation a secondary issue that occurs only because the texts occur.
Or is that just one step too far. I can understand that it might be for religions that are based on texts. Bit like turkeys voting for christmas, so I don’t supposes the idea will gain much favour, but why are texts sacrosanct. Is the goodness of the human heart only apparant because we have texts that tell us and for us to read. I learnt my morals from my Mum and she had prayers taught to her in a language that is so old no one actually knows what they mean and her morals came from her Mum. Did not stop her from knowing what is right from wrong. So I ask again - why are texts relevant and sacrosanct for religions. If you can’t look your children in the eye and face to face persuade your children of the relevance and rightness of your religion, then its a con to fall back on text and ‘intepretations’ as a justification.
Sonia - ( or as far as i can see, dodgy imperial practice, which is clearly not restricted to the desert! Still God appears to choose the desert for sending memos, so hey)
good question - and why wasn’t Muhammad a Jew? - all the other prophets were? Maybe God woke up one day in the 6th century and remembered where he had hidden all the oil, and decide he need to send his next prophet to stake a claim on it - Did he know he might be forgotten by the 20th century? - so wanted to make sure he was still in the news, so to speak - Is that a plausible answer?
Justforfun
oops - there’s been a re-boot in the space time continuum. - I meant post 108
Justforfun
Leon
“More unqualified legal opinion Refresh?”
Definitely unqualified.
More unqualified legal opinion Refresh?
Looks like it.
I deleted the comments later when I got back when I could, but I think they were construed wrongly. He explained to me that is not what he meant. But anyway, it seems you are, like many others, only interested in jumping on some comments that get made and then claiming loudly how PP or everything else is being dragged into the gutter. There’s no attempt to look at the broader picture.
Carry on moaning if you want, but I’d much rather prefer constructive discussions.
I’ll stick my two pence worth and say muslims would believe the prophets were muslim..not jew or christian..you can debate that till you’re blue in the face..
Ravi, i understand and respect your point of view but still have mine..
I don’t get the comment on the mcb organising a memorial for other communities…could you imagine the stick if they did that? for one, they would get slammed for speaking on the behalf of others..secondly why is it their remit to do so? blah blah..
Sunny
“I deleted the comments later when I got back when I could, but I think they were construed wrongly. He explained to me that is not what he meant. But anyway, it seems you are, like many others, only interested in jumping on some comments that gate made and then claiming loudly how PP or everything else is being dragged into the gutter. There’s no attempt to look at the broader picture.”
No - you are wrong. I don’t jump on things etc. - there is every attempt to look at the broader picture. Some of us have been doing that long before PP, HP, 9/11, MCB you name it. There is no need for being defensive. I accept that is the way things do/can get debated. The worst you can do is shut yourself off from criticism.
I’ll stick my two pence worth and say muslims would believe the prophets were muslim..
Indeed. Especially widespread amongst Deobandis/Salafis nowadays is to claim that EVERYONE is born a Muslim - hence the rise of the fecking annoying term “revert”.
you can debate that till you’re blue in the face
An old sufi of the Shadhiliya order I spent time a few happy months with with in Cairo when I were a lad, told me that all the Prophets followed the religion of Abraham and were therefore, Abrahmic. Whether thats Jewish, Christian or Islamic, debate till you’re blue up the bum.
By the way, Sunny, I appreciate you deleting it.
hehe i knew that would annoy a few…you lot need to chill out…*breathe*
>> hence the rise of the fecking annoying term “revert
yeh i didnt realise this either until afew yrs ago!!
The question was is jest but now you have all sparked my interest with the talk of blue bums and faces - Only the prophets were muslim? or their relatives as well?
Justforfun
sofia: i have to say i really admire your highly charged responses today !
That is interesting. What distinguishes a muslim from a jewish and christian person, then? I would have thought that believing that Muhammad was G*d’s Prophet is a pre-condition of being a muslim. The prophets that came before him clearly knew nothing about him, let alone believe that a non-jew could be ever by sent G*d.
If you get it that the MCB has refused to go the Holocaust Memorial because other communities were not represented, why doesn’t the MCB organise or help organise or sponsor a memorial? Funny because except for these muslims organisations, I haven’t seen families of other genocide victims complaining about the fact that jewish people have a memorial day. The MCB should really try a better excuse if it wants to refuse an invitation to a memorial next time.
ta muchly sofi..shouldve realised earlier than i did it was muzamdar..
anyway..justforfun..those who followed the teachings of the prophets as inspired by God at that particular time were considered “muslim” as they submitted to the teachings. I don’t really think this blog is the place to debate islamic doctrine so won’t go into it any further..i’m sure you can find some internet blog to explain it all to you.
Anyway, it’s kinda sad when we all end up name calling..me included, so thought I might just inject a bit of jest…after all..the weather’s cack..the news isn’t too hot..christmas is looming and that means reruns of the “old classics” on the beeb and itv..on the plus side..at least the mind numbingly boring “i’m a “celeb”" is finished…
justforfun:
if i’m not wrong, salafis/wahabis dont believe Prophet Mohammed’s[pbuh] parents were muslim.
ravi..again that is your opinion and i can’t comment on why the mcb can’t/won’t/doesn’t think it should organise a memorial day..maybe you should write into them and suggest it…
>>I would have thought that believing that Muhammad was G*d’s Prophet is a pre-condition of being a muslim
thats the literal view and possibly applied to most ordinary folk now but prophets are revered in islam and certain sects believe they were muslim pre birth of prophet muhammed (pbuh). it must be said, definitions of ‘muslim’ would be different pre islam and post.
I think the word you’re looking for is al-fitrah. To paraphrase a hadith:
“Every child is born loving the Smiths and Morrissey. It is his parents who turn him into an NME reader.”
119 well said Bananabrain. but clearly its an interest group looking after “muslims” whatever falls into their idea as being ‘good’ for muslims.
sofia, much as i sympathize with what you’re saying, fundamentally the problem it comes to in Muslim countries where “Islamic law” is applied is precisely who has the right, and which interpretation, to ues. So it all then depends on the school of Islamic Jurisprudence, and who the ’scholar’ is. So on the “implementation” level, in a Muslim country, there is effectively a hierarchy of whose opinions are listened to, and who can effectively call themselves a scholar. It’s about the legitimacy, in the end. Yes and that’s where the reality of implementing what is called “Islamic Law”. someone who has been trained in the classical schools of jurisprudence, who has legitimacy in the eyes of authority of that State, if they then decide x and y ruling are Islamic, yes you or I can say its not, but who has the power over those people’s lives? Someone, who claims that it is Islamic Law -that’s what the Saudi authorities have stated. Perhaps they have no right to say to you that what you think is not Islamic, but then how much right does someone else have to say to them that their version is not Islamic too? An investigation into principles of classical jurisprudence which was pretty much set in the 9th Century, would suggest that the Saudi authorities idea of draconian punishments isn’t very far away. WHich is clearly the problem - hanging on to 9th century fiqh is problematic. This is where the whole “reform” business comes from of course. There is a legitimate set of reasons, and we are pretty much looking at it.
so you or I or others like Asma Barlas and Amina Wadud can say all sorts of things, but the people who made up the Hudood laws, and blokes like Qaradawi will come along and dismiss us, and our right to say anything. “what - throw away centuries of classical scholarship! why do you think YOU should know better” is what they say, and unfortunately these guys have plenty of influence, and certainly in Muslim countries, on the petty Mullahs here there and everywhere. Of course that doesn’t prevent anyone - who may or may not be legally subject to those people’s interpretation of what Islam is - from ‘following’ their understanding of Islam.
but they’ll just turn around and ask us as women to keep to our section of the mosque and do “sisterly” style activities and ignore any intellectual contributions we may make. the best irony i thought was the MCB publishing after the hijab/niqab scandal was something along the lines of asking dear sisters to in future to make less of a fuss and not to draw so much attention to themselves!
. I don’t really think this blog is the place to debate islamic doctrine
That is what we call ‘denial’
An investigation into principles of classical jurisprudence which was pretty much set in the 9th Century, would suggest that the Saudi authorities idea of draconian punishments isn’t very far away.
Spot on.
Sofia - ..i’m sure you can find some internet blog to explain it all to you.
- I don’t think so
who knows what I will be reading! Should I put the written works of that well known Indian Islamic scholar Imam Khomenei on my Amazon Wish list for Xmas? Anyway I have sources in the family who would love to chat but that would mean having to talk to them 
and they might try and convince me of the error of my ways, and I wouldn’t even get a drink for my troubles.
Justforfun
the prophet’s parents of course weren’t Muslims, they were PAGAN. both died when he was a child, so he never got to try to convert them. Surely everyone knows this - certainly any Muslim ought to .
Sofia, but you and I know again, the limitations of whose Ijtihad is accepted. Do you think Irshad Manji’s re-interpretation and re-formulation, is going to be acceptable to Saudi authorities? Or affect the Pakistani Hudood laws? Obviously this is all down to the link between a country’s laws, and that country’s particular interpretation of religion.
and there is of course the whole thing about law - and how an expert knows the loop-holes. Ali Eteraz is a very smart guy, of course he is a lawyer, and he has worth reading up, now there is a man who knows how the legal system within Islam has worked in the past, the problems, the loopholes. this story is a good example :
incidentally, you mention the Islamic centres of learning, Cairo, Damascus etc. yes a good point, and we know those places have a long history of learning. Do I understand you to think that because the Prophet was born illiterate, and there was not much “learning” ( well certainly textually) per se in the part of Arabia where he was born - to mean that we should pay less attention to him, in the way we can pay less attention to the Saudis? Of course, the interesting thing is that the culture in that area was of course oral - they had an oral tradition, rather than a written one. there’s plenty of interesting stuff to read up on the Bedouin oral tradition of poetry. However, it certainly didn’t hold up to Alexandria or Damascus for example.
why wasn’t Muhammad a Jew?
Exactly. According to the Torah which, despite Islamic propaganda, remains uncorrupted (they have a real scholarship tradition in retaining Torah scrolls), the Messiah would be a DIRECT descendent of David – a Hebrew, not an Arab. Both Jesus and Mo fail, but more so Mo. At least Jesus was a Jew. Mo was a Pagan by birth.
oops forgot the link to Ali’s article.. is here
of course this was a controversial post to some !
#149 - who is this dickhead?
He is Muhammed, the Prophet of Islam.
oh dear, another keyboard mentalist.
No, the same one.
Sid:
Not another one- rather the same one.
Great minds eh?
oh that one…
@justforfun:
well, if you took that point of view to its logical conclusion you’d have to say that miscarriages of justice only occur because of laws being passed. surely the interpretation of law is an issue wherever law exists; texts exist to be interpreted and any attempt to apply them is therefore interpretation. by this logic, of course, you’d have to abolish the american constitution if you wanted to challenge its interpretation by idiots, which would of course be nonsensical. if you’re proposing the abolition of the Qur’an, Torah and NT, because of the idiots that interpret them in an unpleasant way, then obviously that’s an extreme, disproportionate and nonsensical response. would you get rid of “the origin of species” because of feckwitted social darwinists trying to argue for eugenics? i think not.
the trouble is that that is just as unreliable a method for the transmission of a workable morality as that of textual interpretation, if not more so. your mum and grandmother may have known right from wrong, but it doesn’t therefore follow that everyone’s does. that’s why laws are externalised, otherwise what you end up with is some form of tribal because-i-say-so stupidity like the hudood laws and i think we all know what the problem is with those.
i kind of agree with you, except that your persuasion itself is an interpretation. what you are in fact objecting to is what is known in the trade as the “argument from authority”. as a parent (don’t know if you are) sometimes “because i say so” has to be used until the children are old enough to understand why. and if the children are old enough and don’t accept your reasoning then, frankly, you haven’t made your case and you deserve everything you get. i’m not in the business of stifling intellectual inquiry.
@sofia:
unfortunately, that is itself a cause of problems, because there’s a bunch of opinions that reconcile this point of view by accusing jews of falsifying the entire Torah so it reflects only our own opinion, not what G!D says, therefore we’ve deviated from what the prophets actually said because otherwise we’d all have been muslims in the first place, like abraham was according to them, so every time you find abraham having a drink or dong something unislamic it’s obviously something the jews added to corrupt the text. it’s a corrosive bit of circular reasoning and needs to be qualified whenever some beardy brother starts going on about how great islam thinks the ahl-e qitab are; he almost certainly doesn’t think that modern jews qualify for that status. it’s a bit of a bugbear of mine at the moment and a version of the “they weren’t muslims when they blew themselves up therefore muslims aren’t ever terrorists” argument. like sofi says, “it must be said, definitions of ‘muslim’ would be different pre islam and post.” - that’s right, because, to many muslims, anyone that calls himself a jew since the time of the Qur’an is by definition guilty of denying the word of G!D and therefore kuffar. you just have to cut through all the legal fidgy-widginess that they throw out about the ahl-e qitab till you get to the hard, unpleasant fact of the matter. which is, i need hardly add, interpretation and relies on every statement about the jews in the Qur’an applying to all jews everywhere at any time, as opposed to applying to the “jewish tribes” of the hijaz in the C7th, which frankly makes a lot more sense in the context along with not laying the groundwork for perennial inter-religious hatred.
doesn’t stop every fecker that ever started a religion from claiming that he’s part of the never-ending stream of Divine revelation. ironically enough, everyone claims the tap turned off after *their* revelation, so muslims aren’t that keen on baha’ullah, for instance. the difference of course with jewish prophets is that they prophesied to the jews, not to everybody; only universalist religions require this particular bit of reverse-engineering.
@sonia:
there’s also that damfool mediaeval device known as “the consensus of scholars” which depending on who you listen to, is identical to whatever group wants to claim it for authority at any given time, thus the saudis claim it, the iranians claim it, al-qaeda claim it, al-qaradawi claims